Petition for review of an order of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development is denied and cross-petition for enforcement is granted where: 1) plaintiff’s due process rights were not violated as the agency provided frequent notice that plaintiff chose to ignore; 2) plaintiff’s claim that the monetary penalty was unauthorized because the ALJ did not consider her financial resources fails, as plaintiff walked out of the hearing and a person who fails to supply information forfeits any complaint that the decisionmaker was uninformed on some issue; and 3) plaintiff Fung’s claims fail as the agency’s actions were not arbitrary or capricious, and his attempt to invoke 42 U.S.C. sec. 3603(b)(1) is frivolous.
Read Ho v. Donovan, No. 08-1763
Appellate InformationPetition for Review and Cross-Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentArgued: June 1, 2009Decided: June 23, 2009
JudgesBefore EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, and BAUER and EVANS, Circuit Judges.Opinion by EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge.
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
